Messages

1

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Recent Masterfile Federal Case Vindicates Our Position! A MUST READ

« on: September 19, 2009, 05:53:38 AM »

Great news Oscar!

Of course the victim of this lawsuit probably spend another $5-10K worth of time and worry on this (probably more), so the KEY to keeping legal and worry costs down would seem to be in the quality of ones legal representation.  

I personally just ignored the collection calls from Getty for one image (done many years ago from one long gone graphics designer "gypsy") but I would not hesitate to use Oscar if the heat gets turned up.  As a web designer, I have some fear that work myself (or through one of my graphic designers) did 10  to 15 years ago might have used a copyrighted image that so freely bobbed alone the surf of the internet - and that I will suddenly get an angry call from a normally happy client (and yes some really old site designs are still out there!).  And of course, for a number of years now, I have been purchasing EVERY image for my clients, or using theirs (with a warning to them about their source), their own originals, or (thanks to this site) I now look on the government websites for non-copyrighted images.

I have also donated to this site as your words and that of the Admin have given me the confidence to continue to resist what most agree is an attempt at extortion. One only hopes these predatory threats from Getty and MS eventually get beaten down by the AG's or congress here in the US.

2

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: The famous letter and some questions about liability

« on: January 17, 2009, 10:08:32 AM »

Atch, wait for attorney Oscar to get a chance to address this question or try contacting him in person. Your situation is different because you didn't use the pics yourself but I don't think it makes you more liable.  Probably less.

3

Getty Images Letter Forum / Thank you Matthew and Oscar

« on: November 18, 2008, 07:20:57 AM »

A great big thanks you for putting this form up.  I too am a web designer who has done hundreds of websites and one (1) picture (for our own company website designed in 2002) had a pic where we can't locate the subcontractor to verify if a license was purchased.  None of my clients have received a letter because I never stole pictures to use in websites.  

I am now getting "collection calls" and although bothered by this - in a bizarre way I felt "good" about taking these guys myself with, wait for this ...no representation.  I mean normally doing so would be stupid, but I kind of took the outrageous demands from Getty as personal. I want to get in front of a judge and destroy them.

I will probably send you $150 just to donate in your efforts to help others.  Same for webmaster.  You both should have an inconspicuous paypal donate button somewhere as I would happily pitch in.  I would rather spend Getty demand money on you guys, or at least sending the money to a good hearted attorney.  Be clear though, Getty will never get my money.  

This extortion letter by getty (small g from now on) is causing great worry with some very good people.  Thanks again to the site owner and the legal representative (Matthew Chan & Oscar Michelen) for being a light for justice for the small guy who needs it most.

4

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: new info on Getty

« on: November 19, 2008, 08:26:37 PM »

Thanks Oscar.  

I too felt that Getty did not take measures to properly "mark" their property.  As you probably know, a simple "right mouse click, then save" will capture most images (flash excluded) to your hard drive.  The ease of this function only highlights the probability of "innocent infringement" due to the very young and hyper-dynamic nature of the internet.  

Billions of images continue to "float" around the web completely unguarded.  No protection, no watermarks, nothing.  Many have owners who have not taken adequate measures to, or have simply not been able to properly guard them.  No technology exists to do this (unless you want to discuss whether Pixelscout counts as a protective technology)  And therefore, the probability of unlicensed images ending up on a novice or pro designed website in error - is just too great.  

I believe you are on the right track Oscar.  I would want to believe that any judge looking at how the internet has developed would agree with the "innocent infringement" defense - unless of course, multiple violations occurred by the same person and requests to "cease and desist" by that same person were ignored.  

I just hope there is a way to punish Getty for their heavy handed response.  Some very good people who have never been in trouble now have to deal with the extreme stress of a Getty demand letter for thousands of dollars, or a unnerving call to their home or work to collect this outrageous amount.

5

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: new info on Getty

« on: November 18, 2008, 08:40:28 AM »

Oscar, I could be wrong but did you mention that getty (if in the even they took you to court) would have to provide copyrights for the images in question?

I am familiar with trademarks, etc. but thought that copyrights did not have to be registered, just published and noted?

One of the reply letters back from getty (on the main site) seems to imply this.  But I wanted to clarify because published work like websites (and I assume pictures) doesn't have to be "trademarked" with the patents and trademarks office.  Only service marks, trademarks and patents.  So do they really need copyrights or just proof that the work was published?

6

Getty Images Letter Forum / if it goes to court...

« on: November 18, 2008, 07:59:05 AM »

Oscar,

First another great big thank you for attending to the questions on this website.

My question.  I live in the US and knowing that their demand would probably never go to court, but if it did - and I lost - could I be liable for other costs beyond the amount of the amount they are asking for the picture (like their court costs)?  Their demand letter seems to imply this and I just wanted to know the total potential "theoretical" risks of ignoring their demand and calls.  

My situation: I've got one $1,200 demand on an image I believe is not infringing but I cannot locate the subcontractor that used the picture 6 years ago.  Took down the picture right away, etc. etc.

Thanks

Dave

7

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: Interesting Recent Intellectual Property Issues

« on: November 18, 2008, 07:43:41 AM »

So it would seem that the getty tactic is "Scare High, Settle Lower" may have flaws in its original "business plan".

8

Getty Images Letter Forum / Re: damages

« on: November 18, 2008, 07:31:01 AM »

Thanks Oscar.  This attempt by gotti (my new reference for getty) seems like a twist on the collection attempts I once got for a "listing in an internet yellow pages" that I never asked for.